From Newsgroup: soc.culture.russian

<https://tinyurl.com/24pxr4nk> webpronews.com

Elon Musk Agrees to Ban Wikipedia from X Community Notes ..

...

The very idea of Wikipedia implies it shall be internally
contradictory, by design. In different articles, some event
or person might be covered with different assessments. There
also might be notable discrepancies between versions of the
same article in different languages. Discordance is natural
when content is created with the participation of various
and many enthusiasts/activists, whose experiences, cultural
backgrounds and perspectives differ. Guidelines to cite and
refer to reputable / neutral sources surely serve to ennoble
it, but it cannot eliminate discrepancies, because sources
seeming reputable for some groups of Wikipedia enthusiasts
may not seem so for other groups. Such an internally
controversial product nevertheless might have value as sort
of great exhibition of existing - accepted or suggested -
facts, beliefs and narratives, and diversity of views and
stands even contributes to popularity. But, it's definitely
not fit to be "a judge" in disputes or a fact-checking tool.

Moreover, the above is written in the idealistic assumption
that the Wikipedia content is created by honest, sincere and
selfless enthusiasts. In real life, as soon as something
enthusiasm-driven becomes popular, there are powers seeking
to adapt it for serving their particular interest. Wikipedia
was not an exception. Still, for pretty big number of topics
it remains to be a useful source of information. However, it
has become increasingly biased and unreliable, even fiction-
bearing when it comes to *sensitive topics, somehow related
to cultist and political indoctrination, to various kinds of
present and past conflicts.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2